Climategate

[Garry Nelson's Left Foot]

No mate. No one is saying that climate change is not happening. It is the cause that the argument is about. Because people question that cause. They are called climate change deniers.

Really? That's a misleading name, then. Surely a climate change denier would be someone who denies that climate change is happening?

 

[coventrygull]

Climate change is happening. The reasons can be debated at length but the change is happening. The people who 'deny climate change' (your term as my term 'climate change denial' is deemed pc ? ) either do not understand this or have something to gain by denying it. If you are in a position of political power or have major interests in oil or manufacturing etc, i can see you would have something to gain by denying that the climate is changing.

I am guessing that you are not a senior politician and you don't have major interests in the above. I may be wrong but i suspect not !

People are not denying climate change. They are arguing the cause.

 

[coventrygull]

Really? That's a misleading name, then. Surely a climate change denier would be someone who denies that climate change is happening?

Yes thats the point. Because some scientist and politicians are saying that the cause of climate change is cyclical and not man made they are being called deniers. Yes its misleading thats why the "green" zealots use it.

 

[WATFORD zero]

They are called climate change deniers.

But you said Jehova first !

I do believe a significant number of large organisations have changed their position from 'it's not happening' to 'it is happening, but it's perfectly natural' in the last 10 years.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

I do not feel it is necessary and therefore hard work or not, it is my choice not to join this past time.

I have a neighbour who walks out of his 6 bedroom house, xmas fairy lights an all, down his heated driveway, past his, his wifes and two childrens car's, whilst doing more air miles than an average migrating goose, whilst proudly planting his 3 empty can's of bake beans and 2 plastic lucazade bottles very neatly for the £100,000 environment cart to pick up and deliver to some subsidised company, who's managing director can't believe his luck, I mean just think of the holidays he can have.

That is an absolute cop out. Along the lines of "Well, China aren't doing anything about it, so why should I bother"*. Leading from example is a decent starting point.

Secondly, recycling is not just about carbon footprints. What are we going to do when we run out of landfill space? Don't you think cities would look and feel better if they didn't have tonnes of waste in overflowing bins, recyclable waste actually recycled?

Why would you bin a glass bottle, when it can be reused? Where is the sense in that?

Do you drop litter in the street? I should hope not. How is dropping all your litter in a landfill site any different?

It is much easier to do nothing and very easy to ignore future problems, but very selfish.



* That argument is now defunct as China are (finally) acting.

 

[beorhthelm]

Climate change is happening.

thats rather like saying the weather changes. it was global warming until a few years ago when some pointed out not everywhere would necessarily feel warmer. Anthropological Climate Chage i think is the full title these days, to highlight the point we are supposed to be responsible. problem, for me, is that the effects range from anything from .5deg to 6deg change (btw we've already missed alot of the estimates of the mid-90's) and also there is far more to greenhouse gas theory than CO2. but the emphasis is all too focused on this one gas, which isn't even the most potent, because its the one we produce in copious amounts. funny that.

but i'm just clearly too stupid to understand, i stupid to ask questions about why the scientist all agree that there is ACC but cant agree on the detail, i stupid to be allowed to see the data for myself. most of the raw data is hidden we only get to see the resulting chart that proves the theory pput forward. funny that.

 

[wellquickwoody]

If your point of view is 'I would rather go on holiday than think about future generations' then yes, tha is immoral. You also told a politician to f*** off because he suggested greatly increasing taxes on air travel.

Do you honestly believe the human race can have any noticeable effect on what happens in the long term on this planet?

Did your great great great great great grandad ever think about you? As long as my grandchildren's granchildren are OK that's all I care about as any further down the line I will know nothing about them. And I am confident the earth will survive that long.

And you like paying more tax?

 

[wellquickwoody]

Climate change is happening. The reasons can be debated at length but the change is happening. The people who 'deny climate change' (your term as my term 'climate change denial' is deemed pc ? ) either do not understand this or have something to gain by denying it. If you are in a position of political power or have major interests in oil or manufacturing etc, i can see you would have something to gain by denying that the climate is changing.

I am guessing that you are not a senior politician and you don't have major interests in the above. I may be wrong but i suspect not !

*edit* and seeing Cov's post - I thought Climate change deniers were extra thick tights.

Do I have something to gain, mmmm?

Cheap air travel, less costly petrol, convenience foods, not having to use public transport with the smelly people

 

[BigGully]

That is an absolute cop out. Along the lines of "Well, China aren't doing anything about it, so why should I bother"*. Leading from example is a decent starting point.

Secondly, recycling is not just about carbon footprints. What are we going to do when we run out of landfill space? Don't you think cities would look and feel better if they didn't have tonnes of waste in overflowing bins, recyclable waste actually recycled?

Why would you bin a glass bottle, when it can be reused? Where is the sense in that?

Do you drop litter in the street? I should hope not. How is dropping all your litter in a landfill site any different?

It is much easier to do nothing and very easy to ignore future problems, but very selfish.



* That argument is now defunct as China are (finally) acting.

Aaaaah now this is the point.

Firstly I do not accept the premise that there is man made global warming, so obviously my eagerness to 'lead by example' is somewhat muted.

You see my view is that it is likely that landfill sites do have more capacity or if genuinely not then we could find alternatives to render any waste to a smaller capacity, but that would again impact on emmisions and the myth starts again.

So to keep the environment taxes rolling in, they peddle fear and lies, they then put the onus on us the individual both financially and manually to ease the impending doom.

Whilst we quietly ship nucleur waste to South America make Plastic mountains in some remote Far Eastern villages and fire tons of explosives into Afghanistan mountains.

You see, I just don't feel like 'leading by example' just yet !!!

 

[Notters]

I wonder how many members of the 'Church of Climate Change' support the building of more nuclear power stations?

Me

 

[wellquickwoody]

Me

I take my hat off to you sir. Most members of the 'Church of Climate Change' are also in the secretive association of N.I.M.B.Y..

 

[BLOCK F]

Climate 'change' has always been with us - Roman Britons grew grapes in England in the 1st century, the Vikings settled and farmed Greenland in the 9th century, and there were ice fairs on the Thames in the 17th century.

Climate 'change' is undisputed, but there is still real doubt whether it is man made, or more likely just a part of the earth's natural warming and cooling cycle.

The jury is still very much out in the case of data-fiddling climate scientists, and the quasi evangelical environmental lobby.

New technology is the answer to this, and is obviously what will get us to where we need to be - not politicians setting the clock back 300 years to an agricultural past, and defintely not denying ordinairy working people the right to drive cars, or to take overseas holidays.

.

Absolutely correct.You can't turn the clock back.Whatever the green zealots say,the science , that man substantially affects climate change,is NOT proven.
Lovely excuse for all the leftie,smug,anti-capitalist brigade to have a pop at the 'system'.Add in the interested parties,the well intentioned but misguided masses and WOW,a new religion is born!
What I find most extraordinary up to now, is the complete stifling of debate on the matter.Thank God us 'heretics' have now found a voice.
I am not denying that the climate is changing...I can remember far colder winters...( shame the summers aren't any better tho!!)but the climate always has and always will change.I just do not believe that feeble mankind can affect it to the extent that the warmists claim.
I sincerely believe that all the dosh that the 'authorities' are willing to spend on trying to avert catastrophe would be better spent on the problems that exist in the world today.......many will die from disease,lack of clean water and food well before man made climate change gets them!!
Oh by the way,whatever happened to the chaos that was meant to ensue with the MILLENIUM BUG?Doh,those pesky scientists!

 

[goldstone]

I do not consider myself particularly "green", but there are some things I support:
- More recycling providing it is beneficial (I hear stories from time to time that so much energy is used with trucks hauling recycling material around that it is not green at all)
- Less use of cars where practical. But in order to achieve this we need a massive investment in public transport, particularly railways, which must include FREE PARKING at train stations for rail users.
- Sure we should stop cutting down the rain forests
- Yes we should eat locally produced food where practical instead of hauling fresh food halfway round the globe
- Stop eating meat because cows cause Co2 ... bollocks. Just the kind of statement that turns average Joe against the greenies
- Stop taking overseas holidays / travelling by air ... bollocks. You cannot turn the clock back. People will always want to travel
- Carbon offset programmes sound like a bunch of crap dreamed up by bureaucrats. Stupid.
- If you want to save energy, for a start end the practice of shops having their heating on full blast in the winter (a/c in summer) and the doors wide open!

Just a few random thoughts.

 

[beorhthelm]

Just a few random thoughts.

sorry, not good enough. far too much common sence there, you must be an anti climate change heathen. BURN the non-believer (in a non-carbon relaeasing manner of course)

 

[Notters]

I take my hat off to you sir. Most members of the 'Church of Climate Change' are also in the secretive association of N.I.M.B.Y..

I had to write two essays about nuclear power for my MSc. One of them you could argue for or against it. I was overwhelmingly in favour. It is the best solution to all our power needs at present, until nuclear fusion becomes a reality in 30 years or so.

 

[Notters]

I do not consider myself particularly "green", but there are some things I support:
- More recycling providing it is beneficial (I hear stories from time to time that so much energy is used with trucks hauling recycling material around that it is not green at all)
- Less use of cars where practical. But in order to achieve this we need a massive investment in public transport, particularly railways, which must include FREE PARKING at train stations for rail users.
- Sure we should stop cutting down the rain forests
- Yes we should eat locally produced food where practical instead of hauling fresh food halfway round the globe
- Stop eating meat because cows cause Co2 ... bollocks. Just the kind of statement that turns average Joe against the greenies
- Stop taking overseas holidays / travelling by air ... bollocks. You cannot turn the clock back. People will always want to travel
- Carbon offset programmes sound like a bunch of crap dreamed up by bureaucrats. Stupid.
- If you want to save energy, for a start end the practice of shops having their heating on full blast in the winter (a/c in summer) and the doors wide open!

Just a few random thoughts.

Cows produce methane, not CO2, a much more powerful greenhouse gas.

Who said people won't want to travel? People want lots of things. What people definitely don't want is to all drown beneath the ocean waves, which is the greatest risk associated with global warming.

 

[looney]

Is it possible that denying climate change will become non-pc?

People might run the risk of becoming racist, sexist, ageist and climatist. Will all debate on the subject be stifled like it has on religion, immigration and sexual orientation?

Quite true, the lefties are already labelling sceptics Climate change deniers as if they/we are equvelent of holocaust denying neo-nazis.

The deeper I look into this issue the more it stinks of pure politics.

 

[looney]

I had to write two essays about nuclear power for my MSc. One of them you could argue for or against it. I was overwhelmingly in favour. It is the best solution to all our power needs at present, until nuclear fusion becomes a reality in 30 years or so.

Maybe you should look into Geothermal energy? 2 billion times the theoretical energy potential of wind and solar energy combined and just a deep hole in the ground.

We dont need nuclear energy, Nuclear Fusion using helium3 is less than 20 years away as well.

 

[looney]

If your point of view is 'I would rather go on holiday than think about future generations' then yes, tha is immoral. You also told a politician to f*** off because he suggested greatly increasing taxes on air travel.

So whats the carbon footprint of net immigration from warmer countries?

Travel National and international, winter fuel use, greater consumption in host country?

If its better to source local vegetables then why not labour?

You seem to want it both ways which suggests you either dont properly understand the issue ,or it is a smokescreen for your own political agenda.

 

[BadFish]

I do not consider myself particularly "green", but there are some things I support:
- More recycling providing it is beneficial (I hear stories from time to time that so much energy is used with trucks hauling recycling material around that it is not green at all)
- Less use of cars where practical. But in order to achieve this we need a massive investment in public transport, particularly railways, which must include FREE PARKING at train stations for rail users.
- Sure we should stop cutting down the rain forests
- Yes we should eat locally produced food where practical instead of hauling fresh food halfway round the globe
- Stop eating meat because cows cause Co2 ... bollocks. Just the kind of statement that turns average Joe against the greenies
- Stop taking overseas holidays / travelling by air ... bollocks. You cannot turn the clock back. People will always want to travel
- Carbon offset programmes sound like a bunch of crap dreamed up by bureaucrats. Stupid.
- If you want to save energy, for a start end the practice of shops having their heating on full blast in the winter (a/c in summer) and the doors wide open!

Just a few random thoughts.

quite right, it is more about the energy we waste. The Plasma TV is a good example, if it is being used then fine but why have a little red light burning energy when it is not in use. There are so many of these in every house burning uo energy while not being used. My toaster does not need a light up display!

If we waste less energy we save money and the planet. If we recycle we use less oil and don't cover our planet in waste.

Reduce Reuse Recycle. watch bob the builder! its a simple premise being complicated by politicians and multi-nationals to feed personal greed.